Is it time to de-criminalize Pot posession?

Oleg Bach · May 15, 2009

In closing - pot is a hallucinagen....you can't expect your life to be what it should be if you are in a self enduced fantacy - other who are clear minded will eventually vanquish you...much like an old Viking warrior king is always taken down when he is drunk - When you are impaired by toxins or herbs - you are in a weakened state - and the world is becoming a very tough place to survive in - Pot smokers and habitual drunkards will not do well in crisis - they will all perish - and any government that encourages more dope or more booze is not out for your best interets. Nor are the advocates of pot your friends...a friend pours you a cool glass of water and makes you a fine meal - an mindless enemy passes you a joint - or lays out a line of coke as if in friendship - so many friendships are based on dope and booze - these people ARE NOT YOUR FRIENDS.

benny · May 15, 2009

Then don't smoke it. Again, some people have a genetic disposition to die after eating peanuts, but using the criminal justice system to deal with that would be an abuse of its authority.

Giving something lethal to someone is a crime.

Oleg Bach · May 15, 2009

Giving something lethal to someone is a crime.

Administration of a noxious substance - is the term...it's modern speak for poisoning someone - a lot of the pot has a lot of stuff in it that is poison....

Oleg Bach · May 15, 2009

Oh another thing ----------------"Victimless crime" - I don't gp for that..My wife of 25 years suddenly became a chornic user of pot - now I can not communicate with here in full - we suffered ecomimally because of the lowering of her intelligence level - and NOW - it's to late - I am a victim! NOW I must spend the rest of my days as an old single man and die that way because dope became more important than me....Of course - anything that draws a person out of and away from reality - leaves victims in it's wake...QUESTION: Who is going to cause more damage to their human environment - an impaired person with disinhibited judgement or a sober person with clear judgement?

Sir Bandelot · May 15, 2009

I write of power, not the inconsequence that you worship.

Exactly, like I said... you suck on the tit of power. With you there is no room for debate on any issue, other than following what the power tells you to believe. There is no right, no wrong, other than that which power dictates. It's really very simple

Sir Bandelot · May 15, 2009

Oh another thing ----------------"Victimless crime" - I don't gp for that..My wife of 25 years suddenly became a chornic user of pot - now I can not communicate with here in full - we suffered ecomimally because of the lowering of her intelligence level - and NOW - it's to late - I am a victim! NOW I must spend the rest of my days as an old single man and die that way because dope became more important than me....Of course - anything that draws a person out of and away from reality - leaves victims in it's wake...QUESTION: Who is going to cause more damage to their human environment - an impaired person with disinhibited judgement or a sober person with clear judgement?

There are no victimless crimes, everything is connected. When a business man embezzles money from a corporation, it has ripple effects that steal potential from other peoples pockets.

None of your ancdotes or moralizing addresses the core issue. Its not a question of harm of the substance, that is proven and disproven by countless studies. The question is simpler than that- are the courts the right medium for dealing with drug users, of any kind. Has the drug war been successful. Based on the historical evidence the answer seems to be NO. And today we are hearing that the new US Administration agrees that there has to be a change in the approach to the drug problem. That makes sense, to people who are capable of observing and thinking for themselves.

Anyway someone please tell bc2004 that his new government is behind this too, so he can soon relax and start changing his tune. (not allowed to think)

Oleg Bach · May 15, 2009

Exactly, like I said... you suck on the tit of power. With you there is no room for debate on any issue, other than following what the power tells you to believe. There is no right, no wrong, other than that which power dictates. It's really very simple

BC is just a bragard sometimes - and I have noticed the same rehtorical from him - he's toying with us - I can tell that he is a man of prinple - he is an educator and wants you to understand the mindset of a certain barbaric American elite - don't get personal with him..he is a friend - I can tell you this - He has given a lot of insight in the core of American power and imperial projectionism....He does not follow and believe what the power tells him.....I really do not see that in the man ----you may be overly reactionary and a bit to leftist - it's best to be centralist and have power over the left and rigt hand..that's the point here YOU MUST HAVE POWER. As long as you believe in the powers that be - you grant them power - believe in yourself!

benny · May 15, 2009

Administration of a noxious substance - is the term...it's modern speak for poisoning someone - a lot of the pot has a lot of stuff in it that is poison....

Legalizing pot can come to mean legalizing yet one more poisonous additive in processed food.

GostHacked · May 15, 2009

Or you could just mind your own business and not worry about what someone's eyes look like.
But I think it has less to do with the fact you dislike the look in their eyes and more to do with the fact your wife would rather smoke pot and spend time in her own head than have to spend it talking to you.

Judging from your posts, I don't blame her.

At Oleg's expense, I did laugh at this post. Or maybe the pot was needed to try to understand who and what Oleg really is.

Personally, I have always been a loner. I don't need to entertain, and I don't need to be entertained. I was a loner and spending time in my own head long before I smoked my first joint.

Benny

Legalizing pot can come to mean legalizing yet one more poisonous additive in processed food.

Brownies.

Oleg

NOW I must spend the rest of my days as an old single man and die that way because dope became more important than me....Of course - anything that draws a person out of and away from reality - leaves victims in it's wake...QUESTION: Who is going to cause more damage to their human environment - an impaired person with disinhibited judgement or a sober person with clear judgement?

You can spend the days in solitude if you choose to. Or you can get off your ass, stop feeling sorry for yourself and allow yourself to live again. You are causing much greif to yourself by staying in that mindset. I was there once, actually a couple times. Never again.

Administration of a noxious substance - is the term...it's modern speak for poisoning someone - a lot of the pot has a lot of stuff in it that is poison....

Give me a few kilos of it and I will show you how poisinous it is. Give you 30 minutes on the end of an automobile tailpipe and I gaurantee you are going to be poisoned.

In closing - pot is a hallucinagen....

It does not give me any visions, I don't hallucinate on it at all. It is a hallucinigen, but very mild. Sensory depravation can also lead to hallucinations. In conclusion, it is all in your head.

benny · May 15, 2009

Brownies.

for example

bush_cheney2004 · May 15, 2009

....Anyway someone please tell bc2004 that his new government is behind this too, so he can soon relax and start changing his tune. (not allowed to think)

Even if that were the case, it is far better than to be in the position of waiting for what a foreign government thinks or does. How pathetic......

benny · May 15, 2009

There's no way to make some guy smoking weed in his garage any of your business. That's why poor BC04 is reduced to sputtering "dopers" over and over. All he can do is resort to name-callng because otherwise he has nothing.

He may simply have a unknown allergy that deserves our attention.

bush_cheney2004 · May 15, 2009

Exactly, like I said... you suck on the tit of power. With you there is no room for debate on any issue, other than following what the power tells you to believe. There is no right, no wrong, other than that which power dictates. It's really very simple

I know....because you suckle from the same tits. The only difference is that you bitch and burp complaints even as you swallow the milk as fast as you can gulp it. Brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrp......

benny · May 15, 2009

I know....because you suckle from the same tits. The only difference is that you bitch and burp complaints even as you swallow the milk as fast as you can gulp it. Brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrp......

Very few people still bow before what Bush and Cheney did in 2004.

bush_cheney2004 · May 15, 2009

There's no way to make some guy smoking weed in his garage any of your business. That's why poor BC04 is reduced to sputtering "dopers" over and over. All he can do is resort to name-callng because otherwise he has nothing.

Bullshit.....I can make lots of things that happen in a garage "my business", including the numerous negative consequences of trafficking and using controlled substances. As for name calling, it took me a while to find the name that jacks your geef choked brain the most, so "doper" it is! I wonder why you dislike that characterization so much? Aren't you proud of your "dope"? Or is it "dopemanship".

There's an entire urinalysis industry supported by employers and their concerns about hiring DOPERS. I wonder why (legal or not).

bush_cheney2004 · May 15, 2009

Very few people still bow before what Bush and Cheney did in 2004.

2004? You mean when they were re-elected?

benny · May 15, 2009

2004? You mean when they were re-elected?

Only you can say why you choose this nickname.

bush_cheney2004 · May 15, 2009

Only you can say why you choose this nickname.

Because dopers chose Kerry_Edwards.....they lost.

benny · May 15, 2009

Because dopers chose Kerry_Edwards.....they lost.

I thought it was because you were eager to see the privatization of social security in 2004.

bush_cheney2004 · May 15, 2009

I thought it was because you were eager to see the privatization of social security in 2004.

"Privatization of Social Security" is an oxymoron....but thanks for the complete sentence.

benny · May 15, 2009

"Privatization of Social Security" is an oxymoron....but thanks for the complete sentence.

"Subsidizing private saving accounts" is yet another of the many Republicans' oxymorons.

Edited May 15, 2009 by benny

bush_cheney2004 · May 15, 2009

"Subsidizing private saving accounts" is yet another of the many Republicans' oxymorons.

Happens every day with Roth IRAs, but what does that have to do with dopers partying and trafficking legally in Canada?

benny · May 15, 2009

Happens every day with Roth IRAs, but what does that have to do with dopers partying and trafficking legally in Canada?

Pot is a substance much like what is in Medicare.

BubberMiley · May 15, 2009

NOW I must spend the rest of my days as an old single man and die that way because dope became more important than me....

She's a grown adult making her own decisions. How would incarcerating dopers be a reasonable response to feelings of rejection that you may have?

Edited May 15, 2009 by BubberMiley

BubberMiley · May 15, 2009

Bullshit.....I can make lots of things that happen in a garage "my business", including the numerous negative consequences of trafficking and using controlled substances. As for name calling, it took me a while to find the name that jacks your geef choked brain the most, so "doper" it is! I wonder why you dislike that characterization so much? Aren't you proud of your "dope"? Or is it "dopemanship".

Trafficking is a result of criminalization, but it still isn’t any of your business. Any other vague “negative consequences” that may result from substance abuse that are supposedly “your business” can be dealt with as the bad behaviour they are. Dangerous driving, for example, will always continue to be prosecuted as such.

I didn’t realize all you wanted to do was yank my chain (or the more obscure "jack my geef") by using the term “doper.” I’m flattered, although the term doesn't bother me much at all. I prefer "stoner," but only because it's technically more accurate. But nothing makes my day better than seeing you all flustered and reduced to petty name-calling. It makes me feel victorious.

Edited May 15, 2009 by BubberMiley